At Hearing, Judiciary Democrats Expose Corrupt Trump Antitrust Deals Driving Media Consolidation and Higher Prices for Sports Fans

June 10, 2026

MAGA Lobbying, Politicized Enforcement, and Media Mega-Mergers Leave Consumers Paying More for Less

Washington, D.C. (June 10, 2026)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, led Democrats in calling out how corrupt, politically driven Trump Administration antitrust decisions are accelerating media consolidation, complicating sports broadcasting markets, and forcing consumers to pay more for fewer viewing options.

The hearing included testimony from Anna M. Gomez, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission; Curtis LeGeyt, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Association of Broadcasters (NAB); Clay Travis, Radio Host, Founder, Outkick Media; Jim Hallers, Restaurateur, Founder, and Managing Partner, Citizen’s Grill, The Woodlands, TX.

Consumers are paying higher prices for fewer choices in a rapidly consolidating media market. The Sports Broadcasting Act (SBA), a 65-year-old antitrust exemption designed for a wholly different era of television, is an anachronism in today’s media landscape.

Rep. Becca Balint said: “What is at the heart of all of this is we’ve got fewer choices; we’ve got higher costs. We got services that used to be free, and now they all come with a fee. And that’s the modern American experience right now. And you are right. It cuts across all political persuasions. People are angry. We all feel it. Our paychecks are not stretching as far. Prices are creeping up. Quality of the products that we’re getting is getting worse. It affects everyone except the very few at the top who benefit from this. [..] Competition exists in name only and consumers and fans get ripped off.”
Ranking Member Raskin asked Mr. Travis: “What do you think the consequence has been for your fans across America of these massive media consolidations and mergers?” Mr. Travis explained: “Look, I don’t think there’s any fan in America, regardless of his or her politics, Democrat, Republican or Independent, that would say the sports fan viewing experience is getting better. [...] And in a market-based economy based on capitalism, the opposite should be occurring. We should be getting more affordable, better access. And we’re not seeing that.”
Subcommittee Ranking Member Nadler said: “American sports fans are paying more, getting less, and navigating a fragmented streaming environment that the 1961 Congress could not possibly have anticipated. Reform of this law is a legitimate subject for congressional attention. But you cannot examine the Sports Broadcasting Act in a vacuum. And that is exactly what the Majority is asking us to do today. The same Administration that has suddenly discovered a concern for NFL fans has, over the past year, waved through one of the most aggressive waves of media consolidation in modern American history.”
Rep. Lou Correa asked: “Do we have to pass legislation to fix things after today’s hearing?” Commissioner Gomez said: “My advice to this committee is to look at where there’s an excess of market power and a lack of competition that leads to consumer harms.”

The Trump Administration’s selective, politicized, and corrupted merger review and antitrust enforcement is helping billionaire media moguls while consumers are ignored.

Ranking Member Raskin said: “Why is the Trump Administration, through the DOJ and the FCC, investigating the NFL but not other parties in the market that threaten far worse harm to consumers and society? Well, it turns out that, early in this Administration, according to a Wall Street Journal report, FOX Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch personally lobbied President Trump at a White House dinner to crack down on the NFL’s streaming deals—streaming deals that compete directly with Fox’s broadcast business. And the DOJ’s investigation, like this hearing, appears to be all about helping Mr. Murdoch get a better broadcast deal for FOX. That hardly seems like a methodical or principled way to proceed.”
When asked about Trump Administration’s pressure campaign against media companies by subcommittee Ranking Member Nadler, Commissioner Gomez said: “This Administration has used every lever in its power, including weaponizing the FCC in order to wage its campaign of censorship and control over any content it doesn’t like. And one of the ways that it has done so is through its actions against Disney. It’s clear the White House issues a statement that it is unhappy with some kind of content that is on an ABC station, and the FCC initiates an investigation against that station. And most egregiously, the FCC has now called up all of the local ABC stations of Disney under the pretext of an investigation in order to retaliate against Disney because it has refused to capitulate to this administration’s demands that it fires Jimmy Kimmel or regulate the content of its media reports.”
Rep. Balint said: “The last point I just want to make is because I did attend President Trump’s second inauguration and saw all of the folks who were sitting behind him at the inauguration, including Jeff Bezos. And I just want to remind everybody that the CEO of Amazon gave tens of millions of dollars for the Melania documentary on top of spending 35 million to market this, from my perspective, fluff piece on the first lady. And this is what it’s all about. It’s always about payback. It’s a quid pro quo. And I just feel like these are issues that we can work together across, party on. And I hope that we will do that.”
Ranking Member Raskin said: “The Trump Administration is wading through massive media mergers that will further consolidate sports. And I just wonder if you would say a word about what that means for fans.” Commissioner Gomez said: “These major mergers lead to, in fact, less competition, particularly among the portions of these merged companies that actually provide services to the fans. [...] Less competition means higher prices, and it means more harms to consumers.”